resending to list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sam Douglas <sam.douglas32@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Jan 23, 2008 7:06 AM Subject: Re: Bug in unify rename To: Raghavendra G <raghavendra.hg@xxxxxxxxx> On 1/23/08, Raghavendra G <raghavendra.hg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Its the intended behaviour since 'mv oldfile newfile' has 'failed'. But a > small doubt, does 'ls' in the directory rename was performed (here cluster), > show newfile or oldfile or both? While the volume is offline, an ls will show newfile (to me this seems wrong) -- the file gets renamed in the namespace volume. When the volume is brought back online, ls will show both newfile and oldfile, however as newfile probably doesn't exist on any volumes, you will get an I/O error if you try to read it. To me it seems that calling rename on a file that is unavailable should fail immediately without modifying the namespace, or the file should be `magically' renamed later when the volume comes back online. -- Sam Douglas -- Raghavendra G A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun, Said, "Prey, which leg comes after which?", This raised his doubts to such a pitch, He fell flat into the ditch, Not knowing how to run. -Anonymous
